The primary source Account of the Sack was written by the Greek and Byzantine official and historian, Nicetas Choniates. It was during the year 1204 that Choniates documented the Sack of Constantinople, also known as the Siege of Constantinople, into this short account. This siege on the city was considered part of the Fourth Crusade, which ignited from Pope Innocent III calling to take back Jerusalem from Muslim control. Choniates explained, in terror and distraught, the horridness and disrespect the Fourth Crusade brought about to the great Byzantine city and to the Christian faith. The original intent of the Fourth Crusade was to take back the Holy Land; more specific to this crusade, Jerusalem. Instead, the city of Constantinople was attacked. Choniates explained that this attack left churches robbed and destroyed, women raped, and many murdered, and because of this and the contradicting nature of Christian belief with the outcomes of this crusade, the Fourth Crusade was a complete failure. These examples and many others showed how money, treasure, and self-desire were huge driving forces behind the Fourth Crusade, rather than God’s Will, like the crusaders claimed.
One must first understand what true Christianity taught in order to understand this thesis. It was a peaceful religion that taught people to be evangelical, forgiving, and love one another, and this stood out strongly with Jesus and his teachings. A huge foundation and guide to Christians were the Ten Commandments, and a few that clearly stood out in the case of this crusade were “Thou shall not kill”, “Thou shall not steal”, and “Thou shall not commit adultery”. What happened during the Sack of Constantinople, or the Fourth Crusade for that matter, was just the opposite of what those commandments stated. Choniates gave examples of this. “…Christ was robbed and insulted and His garments were divided by lot; only one thing was lacking, that his side, pieced by a spear, should pour rivers of divine blood on the ground” (Fordham University: Medieval Sourcebook). This was a reference to Jesus’ crucifixion, where his blood was poured out for all to be saved. Instead of the holy blood flowing, the sin of man flowed through the streets of the city, killing people “in Jesus’ name”, as crusaders claimed. What madness must have prevailed in those crusaders minds, people claiming to be Christian servants of God, to say this when there was a commandment stating the complete opposite! Another example: “…the violation of the Great Church (Hagia Sophia) be listened to with equanimity. For the sacred altar, formed of all kinds of precious materials and admired by the whole world, was broken into bits and distributed among soldiers, as was all the other sacred wealth of so, great and infinite splendor” (Fordham University: Medieval Sourcebook). One of the greatest churches, especially back during Byzantine times, was destroyed of its valuables, ones that represented the sacredness of Jesus, and sold off to men. This was a prime example of how money and treasure was a huge driving force behind the Fourth Crusade, rather than God’s Will, like the crusaders claimed. This false statement by the crusaders made the Fourth Crusade more ridiculous, because the real intention was lost, or not even adhered to from the start.
A final quotation that can identify the failure of this crusade was as follows: “In the alleys, in the streets, in the temples, complaints, weeping, lamentations, grief, groaning of men, the shrieks of women, wounds, rape, captivity, the separation of those most closely united. Nobles wandered around ignominiously, those of venerable age in tears, the rich in poverty” (Fordham University: Medieval Sourcebook). Each of the above examples would have summarized what the Fourth Crusade left upon the city of Constantinople. What made it all the more ironic was that these agonies were initiated by those who called themselves God’s people. In Choniates’ conclusion, he stated “Oh, immortal God, how great the afflictions of the men, how great the distress” (Fordham University: Medieval Sourcebook)! This accurately describes the outcome of this event.
In examining Choniates’s account, it can be clearly said that the Fourth Crusade, primarily the Sack of Constantinople, was a failure. It was an ironic failure because Christians, people who were supposed to be a loving and peaceful folk, were the ones who committed the acts of killing, stealing, and raping. In their minds, the attack was likely a victory, but theologically is where the failure and contradicting applied to. Christians were not thought of as being people who committed acts like the above, acts that these people claimed to be for God. Truly it was not in God’s Will, based on scripture, to want His people to kill and harm others. Truly it was, as that contradicts the scripture’s teachings. Even the Pope during the time, himself, the leader of the Christian Church, fell into the trap of being contradictory, as he called for the Fourth Crusade in 1202! Christianity was not what it was or seemed to be during the Fourth Crusade, as it got a shocking and bad reputation because of the events that occurred. The crusaders were what made it, their religion, look that way, however, which is what made the event all the more of a failure.
One must first understand what true Christianity taught in order to understand this thesis. It was a peaceful religion that taught people to be evangelical, forgiving, and love one another, and this stood out strongly with Jesus and his teachings. A huge foundation and guide to Christians were the Ten Commandments, and a few that clearly stood out in the case of this crusade were “Thou shall not kill”, “Thou shall not steal”, and “Thou shall not commit adultery”. What happened during the Sack of Constantinople, or the Fourth Crusade for that matter, was just the opposite of what those commandments stated. Choniates gave examples of this. “…Christ was robbed and insulted and His garments were divided by lot; only one thing was lacking, that his side, pieced by a spear, should pour rivers of divine blood on the ground” (Fordham University: Medieval Sourcebook). This was a reference to Jesus’ crucifixion, where his blood was poured out for all to be saved. Instead of the holy blood flowing, the sin of man flowed through the streets of the city, killing people “in Jesus’ name”, as crusaders claimed. What madness must have prevailed in those crusaders minds, people claiming to be Christian servants of God, to say this when there was a commandment stating the complete opposite! Another example: “…the violation of the Great Church (Hagia Sophia) be listened to with equanimity. For the sacred altar, formed of all kinds of precious materials and admired by the whole world, was broken into bits and distributed among soldiers, as was all the other sacred wealth of so, great and infinite splendor” (Fordham University: Medieval Sourcebook). One of the greatest churches, especially back during Byzantine times, was destroyed of its valuables, ones that represented the sacredness of Jesus, and sold off to men. This was a prime example of how money and treasure was a huge driving force behind the Fourth Crusade, rather than God’s Will, like the crusaders claimed. This false statement by the crusaders made the Fourth Crusade more ridiculous, because the real intention was lost, or not even adhered to from the start.
A final quotation that can identify the failure of this crusade was as follows: “In the alleys, in the streets, in the temples, complaints, weeping, lamentations, grief, groaning of men, the shrieks of women, wounds, rape, captivity, the separation of those most closely united. Nobles wandered around ignominiously, those of venerable age in tears, the rich in poverty” (Fordham University: Medieval Sourcebook). Each of the above examples would have summarized what the Fourth Crusade left upon the city of Constantinople. What made it all the more ironic was that these agonies were initiated by those who called themselves God’s people. In Choniates’ conclusion, he stated “Oh, immortal God, how great the afflictions of the men, how great the distress” (Fordham University: Medieval Sourcebook)! This accurately describes the outcome of this event.
In examining Choniates’s account, it can be clearly said that the Fourth Crusade, primarily the Sack of Constantinople, was a failure. It was an ironic failure because Christians, people who were supposed to be a loving and peaceful folk, were the ones who committed the acts of killing, stealing, and raping. In their minds, the attack was likely a victory, but theologically is where the failure and contradicting applied to. Christians were not thought of as being people who committed acts like the above, acts that these people claimed to be for God. Truly it was not in God’s Will, based on scripture, to want His people to kill and harm others. Truly it was, as that contradicts the scripture’s teachings. Even the Pope during the time, himself, the leader of the Christian Church, fell into the trap of being contradictory, as he called for the Fourth Crusade in 1202! Christianity was not what it was or seemed to be during the Fourth Crusade, as it got a shocking and bad reputation because of the events that occurred. The crusaders were what made it, their religion, look that way, however, which is what made the event all the more of a failure.
Author:
Nicholas Schuldt
Sources:
http://legacy.fordham.edu/Halsall/source/4cde.asp#sack